Manchester Oxford Road

9 posts / 0 new
Last post
sallyhinch
Manchester Oxford Road

This has appeared on Consultation Watch but at risk of being buried - the Oxford road consultations close on the 5th July  http://www.tfgm.com/buspriority/pages/website/consultations-oxford-road.html

While undoubtedly not perfect, this scheme shows real ambition and it's also likely to meet opposition so the more people putting in support and/or constructive criticism (where necessary) the better. Please have a look and, especially if you're Manchester based, have your say

Joe Costello

The Mad Cycle Lanes of Manchester blog has covered this, giving the link to respond to the consultation along with suggestions about what to say: http://madcyclelanesofmanchester.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/oxford-road-cons...

The worst bit is that they're going for painted cycle lanes along most of the length, which will no doubt end up full of cars stopping.

The bus stop bypasses look good, but for some reason not all the bus stops are being done. (Which I don't understand, either they're required or they're not. Which is it?!)

pete owens

Removal of most of the motor traffic and the speed limit are excelent and will put the road into the zone on the CROW speed/flow diagram where sharing the carriageway is the most appropriate solution.

Taking the cycle lane behind the bus stop looks bonkers. The purpose is to enable cyclists to overtake stopped buses, but the only reason buses stop is to let passengers get on and off - so at the one time the lane is inteded to be useful it will be unuseable due to crossing pedestrian traffic. It will be intimidating for disabled and particularly visually impaired people who rely disproportionately on buses to have to dismount across a stream of fast moving and virtually silent vehicles, particularly as they will approaching hidden from view behind bus shelters.

From the reply I had to the consultation, it appears that the cycle lanes are to be kerbed. This means that if a pedestrian steps onto it or a taxi stops to drop of on it or a van parks there to unload then the cyclists will have nowhere to go to take avoiding action. Crossing 50mm kerbs presents no barrier to pedestrians or motor vehicles, but would be a serious hazard for cyclists. I'm not sure how they expect cyclists to be able to make right turns .

The best way to treat the road would be to use the combined space to create wide shared lanes so that cyclists and buses have plenty of space to overtake each other.

Dr C.
Dr C.'s picture

Removal of most of the motor traffic and the speed limit are excelent and will put the road into the zone on the CROW speed/flow diagram where sharing the carriageway is the most appropriate solution.

As a resident of Manchester's Oxford Road corridor for nearly six years, I can assure you that even after removing the private motor traffic, there will still be far too much motor traffic for a sufficiently subjectively safe cycling environment. Sharing the carriageway is clearly not the most appropriate option for what locals will regularly tell visitors is 'the busiest bus route in Europe.'

Taking the cycle lane behind the bus stop looks bonkers. The purpose is to enable cyclists to overtake stopped buses, but the only reason buses stop is to let passengers get on and off - so at the one time the lane is inteded to be useful it will be unuseable due to crossing pedestrian traffic. It will be intimidating for disabled and particularly visually impaired people who rely disproportionately on buses to have to dismount across a stream of fast moving and virtually silent vehicles, particularly as they will approaching hidden from view behind bus shelter.

And yet it has been shown to work very nicely in The Netherlands for years. Where the cycle track is to be crossed by pedestrians, this should be at grade with the pavement and be marked with tactile paving. For the volumes of bus passengers on Oxford Road there will need to be bus stop islands with the cycle track passing behind.

From the reply I had to the consultation, it appears that the cycle lanes are to be kerbed. This means that if a pedestrian steps onto it or a taxi stops to drop of on it or a van parks there to unload then the cyclists will have nowhere to go to take avoiding action. Crossing 50mm kerbs presents no barrier to pedestrians or motor vehicles, but would be a serious hazard for cyclists. I'm not sure how they expect cyclists to be able to make right turns .

This is the one area where you aren't completely wrong - schemes like this benefit immensely from angled kerbs as they allow full use of the track, eg passing other cyclists. However, a taxi is more likely to either just pull in to the side of the carriageway to unload or pull into a side-street. Van parking hasn't been an issue on the old Oxford Road so I don't see that chaging because of this. The supposed issue of right-turns simply wouldn't exist on Oxford Road as right turns are generally either blocked off or at signalised junctions - cyclists will make right turns as they always have, albeit with extra protection available.

The best way to treat the road would be to use the combined space to create wide shared lanes so that cyclists and buses have plenty of space to overtake each other.

That approach is fundamentally unworkable and has achieved success nowhere. The motor traffic speed which you cite as a reason for cyclists being able to safely share the carriageway needs to be enforced by narrow lanes - wide lanes result in higher speeds and encourage nuisance parking, both of which suppress cycling.

Further reading

Integration vs Segregation - an discussion of why the measures needed to produce integrated cycling are fundamentally unworkable

No Surrender - an examination of the historical attitudes towards cycle infrastructure from cycle campaigners in the UK

More on bus-stop bypasses

adama

As a resident of Manchester's Oxford Road corridor for nearly six years, I can assure you that even after removing the private motor traffic, there will still be far too much motor traffic for a sufficiently subjectively safe cycling environment. Sharing the carriageway is clearly not the most appropriate option for what locals will regularly tell visitors is 'the busiest bus route in Europe.'

Another resident of Manchester here - and I agree entirely with the Embassy's response to the proposals.  Sharing the carriageway with buses is never pleasant, but especially on this route it would be awful.  There's no chance my wife would be willing to cycle there while sharing with the buses, and I expect lots of other people would feel the same.  Proper segregrated tracks with angled kerbs is the way to go.  I don't see any problem going round the back of bus stops if it's done properly, like Dr C describes.

pete owens

For any advocate of segregation to fail to appreciate why more vulnerable road users than yourself do not like sharing the pavement with fast moving vehicles shows a serious lack of empathy.

The justification for the path behind the bus shelter is to enable cyclists to overtake buses - but at the only situation where you would overtake is when the bus is stopped to let passengers on and off - so at any time a cyclist was using the facility to overtake a bus they would have to stop for the crossing pedestrian traffic - thus defeating the entire purpose (at least for responsible cyclists). I can't see any way round this; it is a fundamental and intractable problem that no amount of tinkering with the design can overcome.

The only way such a facility could appear to be remotely workable was if buses were so infrequent that cyclists rarly encountered them at the time they were using it. You also need sufficient space to keep the cycle path well clear of obstructions such as the bus shelters which prevent pedestrians and cyclist seeing each other approaching. Oxford Road is a very busy pedestrian environment with very frequent stopping buses and the path is shown imediately adjacent to the bus shelters.

pete owens

Which part of "normal" right turning involves bunny hopping over a kerb? And there are plenty of junctions where cyclists would need to turn right either to join or leave that stretch of Oxford Road. Detail is important in designing for cyclists and it is important that we reject the c**p for there to be any chance of achieving anything remotely useable (and in this case, even the schemes designers admit that it is rubbish: http://madcyclelanesofmanchester.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/oxford-road-consultation-please-respond.html

I have just received an email admitting that the cycle tracks along Oxford Road will be inconvenient for many cyclists and the writer will be using the road.

Road narrowing has no effect on traffic speeds (unles it is very narrow and tightlyconstrained - ie beyond the contemplation of UK traffic engineers) and is also one of the most intimidading features of highway design for cyclists. It is astonishing to find someone purporting to be a cyclist arging the case for  narrow lanes.

To see how cycle lanes REDUCE the amount of space for cyclists see:

http://www.warringtoncyclecampaign.co.uk/report/cycle-lanes.pdf

Anyone who still thinks cycle lanes help in any way whatsoever should explain why they think the situation in fig 3b is an improvement on fig 3a.

 

adama

For any advocate of segregation to fail to appreciate why more vulnerable road users than yourself do not like sharing the pavement with fast moving vehicles shows a serious lack of empathy.

Please try not to be too personal with your responses.  I'm aware of the risk to pedestrians if a cycle-track is done badly, and I agree it is vital that this does not happen.  Dr C has already mentioned some things that can potentially be done to reduce/remove any risk to pedestrians - things which have already been done elsewhere and can be looked at to see how effective they really are.  Inevitably going behind a bus stop would require cyclists to take care and give way, but with proper design (raised tables, plenty of space, etc) that should be possible without turning the cycle route into an obstacle course.  At the same time, a proper design can also avoid the cycle track being like a race-track which puts pedestrians at risk.

On the other side of the coin (/bus-stop?) I'm also aware of the risk to cyclists that results from sharing with large vehicles.  Besides the potential for serious consequences if/when something does go wrong, having to share with buses will certainly put many people off using the route.  The fast and the fearless may be happy to share a road with buses, but many others never will be.

Personally I think it would be better if the bus and cycle routes could be completely separated.  Parallel routes down different streets would be nice, but that comes with other problems - mainly that the places people want to go (shops, uni, etc) are actually on Oxford Road itself, so building a route somewhere else is a bit pointless.

adama

To see how cycle lanes REDUCE the amount of space for cyclists see:

http://www.warringtoncyclecampaign.co.uk/report/cycle-lanes.pdf

Anyone who still thinks cycle lanes help in any way whatsoever should explain why they think the situation in fig 3b is an improvement on fig 3a.

I would agree that 3b is no real improvement on 3a.  Painted lanes (like the "superhighways", sadly) don't make things any better or safer.

Separated cycle tracks (done properly) are a different thing altogether though.

Log in or register to post comments